Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37899165›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2023

What do healthcare providers think of the quality of uterotonics? A mixed-methods systematic review.

Maria Regina Torloni, Ana Pilar Betran, Martha Vazquez Corona, Meghan Bohren, Mariana Widmer

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Moving beyond a legacy paradigm: A vision for equitable access to quality medicines in Africa.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  2. FIGO call to action: Multisectoral approach to postpartum hemorrhage.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Maria Regina TorloniEvidence Based Healthcare Post-Graduate Program, São Paulo Federal University, São Paulo, Brazil torlonimr@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4944-0720
Ana Pilar BetranUNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5631-5883
Martha Vazquez CoronaGender and Women's Health Unit, Nossal Institute for Global Health, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Meghan BohrenGender and Women's Health Unit, Nossal Institute for Global Health, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4179-4682
Mariana WidmerUNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo synthesise evidence on the perceptions of healthcare providers (HCPs) about the quality of oxytocin and misoprostol available in their settings, and their actions as a result of these perceptions.

designMixed-methods systematic review. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included quantitative and qualitative studies reporting HCPs' perceptions about oxytocin or misoprostol quality. DATA SOURCES: We searched CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Ebscohost, Embase, PubMed, Global Index Medicus, Portal regional BVS, PsycNET, Scopus and Web of Science from inception to 31 March 2022 and grey literature. RISK OF BIAS: We used the Center for Evidence-Based Management critical appraisal tool for surveys. For qualitative studies, we used the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. We conducted separate quantitative and qualitative syntheses and integrated the evidence into a narrative synthesis (convergent segregated review design).

resultsWe included five (three quantitative and two qualitative) studies, of moderate or high quality, conducted in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). In the three quantitative studies (N=7065 participants), 8.2-21.3% of HCPs had experienced problems due to known/suspected low-quality oxytocin and 3.3% due to low-quality misoprostol. In the two qualitative studies, perception of oxytocin quality varied. In quantitative studies, when confronted with suspected/known low-quality oxytocin, 29-78% of HCPs would inform a supervisor, 62% would document this in writing, 45-54% would change to another drug and 5-37% would double the dose of oxytocin. Qualitative evidence suggests that many HCPs do not formally report suspected low-quality oxytocin or misoprostol, and use higher doses or additional uterotonics.

conclusionsA proportion of HCPs from LMICs perceive oxytocin to be of low quality. There is very limited evidence on their perceptions about misoprostol. Many HCPs do not report suspected low-quality uterotonics but change to another medicine or double the dose of oxytocin. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022323812.

Indexed as

MisoprostolPostpartum HemorrhageFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansOxytocinMisoprostolOxytocinAdverse eventsMaternal medicineQUALITATIVE RESEARCHSystematic ReviewToxicity

Identifiers

PMID37899165
PMCPMC10618966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.